<center>https://cdn.pixabay.com/photo/2014/09/01/05/28/puzzle-432569_1280.jpg </center> 

### Honolulu became the first city in the United States to move forward with a <b>*distracted walking law*</b> that seeks to ban people from texting while they are crossing the street. 
<center> </center> And now Pomona Valley city, in Southern California, has also recently passed similar legislation, making it illegal for people there to <b>cross the street</b> while using their mobile phone.

<center>https://media.giphy.com/media/3ohhwsYLvxxsRVIZsQ/giphy.gif </center>

The idea is that people of all ages are <b>putting themselves at risk</b> when they opt to look at their phone rather than the street in front of them. So the state insists that this move is to <b>keep people safe</b>.

 Ironically, <b>safety</b> always tends to be used as the excuse whenever the government wants to pass a law that seemingly restricts our freedoms. And in this instance, liberty is infringed under the justification of trying to keep people safe. 

The victims of this new legislation are going to be extorted from, having violence initiated against them, because the state viewed them as having engaged in an activity that might have endangered someone at some point. What's really happening though is people are being fined over victimless crimes; the state earns yet another opportunity to acquire funds from the public. *Their idea of “security” looks a lot like violence in disguise*. 

When the government gets busy with trying to keep people safe from themselves, natural rights and individual liberties will be continually encroached upon and violated as they have been. 

<center>http://differenttruths.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/xunderneath-the-stairwell-nanny-state-680x475-680x400.jpg.pagespeed.ic.Ho7PYITfrg.jpg</center>

The concern for safety shouldn't automatically trump personal liberty. And the more that the state wants to infringe upon personal freedoms, the more that they will endanger the public and ultimately make them *less safe*.

Critics of these sorts of restrictions, bans on texting while walking etc, have previously suggested that this sort of legislation only seeks to draw attention away from what might really be a factor that is contributing to the problem. This could be something such as poor and failing infrastructure. 

Also, if a pedestrian is crossing the street when they have the right to do so, then it shouldn't matter how they are crossing the street. When crossing the street during their time to do so, the responsibility is on the driver to operate safely and not endanger them. So now, even if someone safely crosses the street when it's their turn to do so, they'll be putting themselves at risk of being financially victimized by the state. 

Pedestrians being distracted while crossing the street isn't anything new, and the majority have been multi-tasking successfully for years. If it's truly about safety, *why stop at phones?* why not make any and all multitasking while walking a crime? Smoking, eating, drinking, listening to music, dog walking, reading, how and where do  you draw the line? Instead of playing that game though, let's choose to embrace freedom and personal responsibility, rather than fostering a nanny state and passing yet one more unnecessary piece of legislation. 

Pics:
Pixabay
Starz via giphy
differenttruths.com

Sources:
https://www.cnn.com/2017/07/29/us/smart-phones-crosswalks-hawaii-illegal/index.html
https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2017/oct/25/honolulu-fines-people-for-texting-while-crossing-road
http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-montclair-texting-walking-20180225-story.html

## Related Posts:
### Are Traffic Cameras Rigged Against Drivers?
https://steemit.com/technology/@doitvoluntarily/are-traffic-cameras-rigged-against-drivers